U.P Jal Nigam and Anr. v. Nareshwar Sahai Mathur and Anr.

Leave granted. The matter relates to the promotion to the post of Chief Engineer, Level II in U.P. Jal Nigam. Th U.P. Public Service Tribunal is specially D constituted to consider the service grievances of the government servants of the U.P. State. When Government servants, Mr. Om Narain Dwivedi and S.C. Atri, approached the High Court of Allahabad at Allahabad Bench for redressal of their service grievances, two different Benches of the High Court by orders dated March 23, 1993 and April 15, 1993 directed them to avail of the statutory alternative remedy available from the Tribunal and in case they were unsuccessful in getting the relief, to ap­ proach the High Court. The respondent, who was also a Govt. servant filed the Writ Petition in the High Court of Allahabad at Lucknow Bench seeking relief as regards his service grievance and the High Court enter- tained the Writ Petition and directed the parties to complete their plead­ ings. The appellant filed an application to dismiss the Writ Petiton and direct the respondent to avail of the statutory remedy. The Division Bench, by the impugned order dated January 19, 1994, held that since the plead­ ings were complete, it was not necessary to relegate the parties to the Tribunal to avail of the statutory remedy and that, therefore, dismissed the G application. Thus, this appeal by special leave. It is contended for the respondents by Mr. Pramod Swarup, the learned counsel for respondents that since the pleadings were complete, direction was given by the learned Chief Justice for early disposal and hence this is not a case warranting interference under Art. 136. We find H no force in the contention. U.P.1ALNIGAM v. N.S.MATIIUR 317 When a statutory Tnbunal was constituted specially to look into the A grievances of the government servants, it is statutory obligation on the part of such government servants, first to avail of the statutory remedy. In case, they are aggrieved against the order passed by the Tribunal, the remedy under Art. 226 is always available to them. Under these circumstances, when the two Division Benches had rightly declined to entertain the Writ B Petitions and directed the parties to avail of the statutory remedy, another Division Bench was wholly unjustified in entertaining the Writ Petition under the impugned order and directing its early disposal. · The appeal is accordingly allowed. The High Court is requested to transmit the papers to the Tnbunal. It is open to the respondents to avail C of the statutory remedy to avail of the statutory remedy before the Tribunal. No costs. G.N. Appeal allowed.